Where the Action is in Contemporary Criminology - Essay Example

? Where the action is in Contemporary Criminology Criminology refers to the scientific study of criminals and criminal tendencies and behavior. The aim of this study is to formulate theories that explain reasons behind the occurrence of crime while testing the same theories by behavior observation (Chris 2009, p. 2). “Theory is an activity that is very much where the action is in contemporary criminology”. This is so because the theories that have been developer to explain criminology are all based on occurrences and events that took place in a specific time and place. Where the action is, implies where the event took place. This so called action is what crime analysts use to build their criminology theories used both for speculative and preventive purposes. Through these theories, one is able to detect, discern and prevent criminal activity. Criminologists can also know how to respond to crime after it occurs based on these models. The various theories associated with criminology are distinct and applicable in different scenarios. They describe different courses of events and tell different tales. Some can be used in combination especially if the goals that get sought become achievable through different avenues. Unfortunately, criminology is a practice. This means that crime gets perpetrated (Ronald 2004, p.14). Though Criminology becomes based on a theoretical platform, the theories explain actual activities and events, and are an indicator of where the action is or where the action is going to be. Three integral parts make up the Criminal Justice System. This includes the legislature, the adjudication (Law Courts), and the correctional facilities (prisons, juvenile detention centers, jails, probation and parole). These arms of the Criminal Justice System work hand in hand to uphold the rule of law in society. Those who fail to do so get taken up by the system so as to protect the public (George 2007, p. 19). The Criminal Justice System has evolved over the years due to the changing dynamics of criminology. Over the years, crime has become complicated, and the criminal justice system has equally developed to level up to the ever changing phenomenon that is crime. As a result, there have been massive developments in the criminal justice systems both locally and abroad. The criminal justice system has developed to try and enhance crime prevention. It cannot be emphasized enough that crime prevented is crime stopped (George 2007, p. 79). Crime prevention is one of the goals of the criminal justice system. In a bid to reduce the occurrence of crime, several measures get undertaken by the different parts of the criminal justice system. The legislative arm of government has been keen to pass bills that spell out severe consequences for perpetrators of crime (George 2007, p. 69). The thought behind this is that this would act as a deterrent factor by instilling fear among criminals and reducing the odds of crime occurrence. In recent times, the members of the House of Representatives and Senate have been on a campaign to eradicate crime in their areas of jurisdiction. This has led to a reduction in crime occurrence, in the United States. Though politics has always been a challenge in the passing of criminal laws, significant strides get made to deter people from engaging in criminal activities due to the stringent measures put in place and laws passed against criminals (George 2007, p. 84). There has been a considerable development in the judicial system, especially the court system, to prevent crime. Changes get made by the different governments that assume leadership into power, especially with regard to the head of the courts. All this gets done in an attempt to spear head reforms in the courts that will lead to making of fair judgment (Anthony 2008, p. 90). Corruption and underhand dealing in the courts to alter judgments, and influence the outcome of court cases and trials, is now at its all time low. Keen vetting of judicial office holders such as judges and District Attorneys reduce the possibility of an unqualified or corrupt individual from assuming office. The stiff penalties stipulated in the penal code and laws passed by the legislature have to be upheld by the courts. This means that those found guilty of criminal activities will not go unpunished. These stiff penalties passed on by the courts also act as a deterrent factor against crime. Correctional facilities such as jails, prisons and penitentiaries, get charged with the mandate of carrying out the sentence passed on to criminals by the courts. These facilities help to prevent crime by holding in seclusion the criminal elements in society so as to prevent them from undertaking crime. This creates a buffer zone between criminals and the society thereby reducing the chances of crime occurrence (Anthony 2008, p. 167). On a global scale, developments in Criminal Justice systems become informed by stands taken by the United Nations. The United Nations Congress on Criminal Justice and Crime Prevention, held in Salvador in April 2010 had a remarkable influence in international crime prevention policies, and national and professional practices. The goal of the 12th Crime Congress was to enhance crime prevention policies and measures across the globe. The principal avenues of the discussions in the 12th Crime Congress revolved around establishing the criminal justice system as the integral pillar in combating crime (Jeffrey 2011, p.116). Criminology theories are the best and most accurate ways of explaining crime. These theories become tried and tested over the years to quantify their efficiency. Classical criminology theory fronts that crime is an outcome of beliefs that the benefits of perpetrating crime are much greater. People get torn between two scenarios in criminology (Jeffrey 2011, p.76). In one scenario, crime gets thought of as profitable because one will certainly get caught in the end. In the other scenario, crime is the best option as one will never get caught. Most of the criminals are of the second opinion. It emphasizes that people often commit a crime after they have made a rational choice by comparing the potential benefits and costs of crime. This theory recognizes that all people are capable of committing a crime, but they often get deterred by the punishment that crime attracts. Psychological theories of crime put across by criminologists that try to explain emotional and intellectual development gets split into three categories. The Social learning criminology theory fronts that criminal behavior is to a large extent learned, but the negative effects of biological factors ought not to be excluded. This theory got put across by A. Bandura in 1973 who believes that social learning can either be direct or indirect. According to this theory, negative or positive effects on behavior are as a result of direct social learning (Anthony 2008, p. 69). Punishment should not be aggressive because corporal punishment is a negative form of character. Indirect social learning becomes solely based on the thought of other people’s character as non desirable or desirable. Different patterns of punishments and rewards have different effects on people. The Moral development criminology theory describes the growth and maturity stages that all people undergo when gaining the capacity to make moral judgments. The development process may either be completed or cut short due to a number of reasons. Due to this incomplete process, those who are not able to distinguish right from wrong are more likely to engage in morally decadent behavior and criminal activities (Jeffrey 2011, p.46). The Personality theory assumes a group of tendencies and perceptions that ell people develop through early socialization. This theory fronts that specific tendencies and personal traits like extroversion and impulsiveness give an indication to, and increase the possibility of criminal behavior. Those with such tendencies should be treated to programmes such as counseling sessions and scrutiny to monitor any possible progression into crime. Under the theory of frustrated aggressiveness, criminologists state that frustration is one of the causes of criminal tendencies. Frustration can be described as a state of utter discomfort as a result of the inability to achieve set goals or find solutions to specific problems (Gottfredson 2001, p. 67). The inability to graduate has been a frustration source for many juvenile offenders. John Dollard and his colleagues from Yale University substantiated that frustration gives forth aggression, and all aggression is as a result of frustration. Frustration can be a source of crime. Prevention from aggression can go a long way in the prevention of crime in modern societies. The theory of Social Anomie gets based on the concept of the existence of a huge gap between one’s desires and the ability to attain those desires. Under this theory, one often questions why he should do socially correct activities, while he is sure of another behavior model that is satisfactory, and does not require lots of effort (Gottfredson 2001, p. 117). This theory also comes to light when old rules become irrelevant, and new rules get into direct conflict with the old ones. A good example of the Social Anomie theory is when one opts to steal rather than to work hard for something. In order to prevent indulgence in crime, hard work must be emphasized amongst ourselves, so as to reduce the wide gap that exists between desires and the ability to acquire them. Though it sounds absurd, biological criminology theory is of the opinion that chromosome aberrations could be the cause of crime. Individuals with XYY chromosome syndrome popularly known as the macho men are likely to commit a crime. This becomes proven to be unjustified and largely baseless (Chris 2009, p. 102). Other studies have shown that hormones have an impact on the occurrence of aggression. These studies tested the relationship that exists between testosterone and aggressive behavior. This theory cannot be used to solve any form of crime because it lacks a solid base. Bibliography Anthony, T., 2008, The Critical Criminology Companion. New York: Hawkins Press. Chris Hale., 2009, Criminology. Oxford: Oxford University Press. George F.Cole, C. E., 2007, Criminal Justice in America. Stamford: Cengage Learning. Gottfredson, M., 2001, A General Theory of Crime. Stanford: Stanford University Press. Jeffrey Maas, G. V., 2011, Criminology: Theory, Research, and Policy. New York: Jones & Bartlett Publishers. Ronald L. Akers, C. S., 2004, Criminological Theories:Introduction, Evaluation and Applications. Los Angeles: Ruxbury Publishing Company. Read More